Dropbox Chia Farming


I´m using rclone to farm chia on google drive and on dropbox. On google drive I have 0 issues because response time is quick but on dropbox response time is not quick enough and I need to know if changing my rclone mount flags would help at all. I´m using this setup right now:

rclone.exe mount dropbox: F: --cache-dir "C:\rclone-vfs-cache" --multi-thread-streams 1024 --multi-thread-cutoff 128M --network-mode --vfs-cache-mode full --vfs-cache-max-size 100G --vfs-cache-max-age 240000h --vfs-read-chunk-size-limit off --buffer-size 0K --vfs-read-chunk-size 64K --vfs-read-wait 0ms -v

I need cache not to expire and I have disk enough, thats why I have those --vfs-cache-max-size 100G and --vfs-cache-max-age 240000h.
--vfs-read-chunk-size 64K is because chia uses this amount for reading plots. I´m also farming on a remote harvester near dropbox servers to get less latency.
I need to speed this up a little bit, 30% faster would be enough. Is there any way or any flag I can modify/add/remove to get better response times (reading the chia plots faster)?

It would be very helpful as I have 200 plots on my dropbox and I sold my drives. Thanks.

...and this is why we can't have nice stuff


what????? :sweat_smile: :sweat_smile: :sweat_smile: :sweat_smile:

1 Like

Hello alfa404,

You may find useful information in some of the earlier threads on the subject:

No I didnt find useful information to get response time lower, only to solve errors that I already have solved.

OK, I had hoped so and then can’t help you any further. Happy farming :slight_smile:

Someone can help me?

How does your ping to Google drive compare with Dropbox?

The latency will make a lot if difference.

You could run it in a VM closer to the Dropbox data center.

Yes Im doing that, my latency its 0-1 ms for almost all plots (they are on different servers).

Latency from the server running rclone mount to the Dropbox API servers?

there are various IPS, but mainly around 0-10 ms, its enough I think... I think config for rclone mount could get better... changing flags affects hugely response times (based on my experience). Thats why I ask here...

a plot is approx 100GB and the chia app works with one plot at a time?
the chia app will have to read from the entire plot, every byte of it?

--- for a plot, once the app has requested the chunk from rclone, will the app need to access the chunk again?
can i assume the answer is no, as you use --vfs-cache-max-age 240000h

when my emby media server streams from cloud,

  • use --read-only
  • do not use any vfs file cache flags, in effect --vfs-cache-mode=off
  • use --buffer
    in that way, reduces rclone's overhead dealing with local file system.
    and works great on resource limited devices such as a raspberry pi zero.

the chia app will have to read from the entire plot, every byte of it?


The vfs cache helps getting faster response time I think. But I´m gonna try. So I test:

rclone.exe mount dropbox: F: --read-only --vfs-cache-mode=off --buffer --multi-thread-streams 1024 --multi-thread-cutoff 128M --network-mode --buffer-size 0K -v


buffer flag its incorrect, I´m gonna check.

2022-02-16T08:38:51.103 chia.plotting.check_plots : WARNING Looking up qualities took: 12348 ms. This should be below 5 seconds to minimize risk of losing rewards.
2022-02-16T08:39:33.655 chia.plotting.check_plots : WARNING Finding proof took: 42548 ms. This should be below 15 seconds to minimize risk of losing rewards.

I think VFS cache is essential, there are some parts of the plot file (pointers) that in every challenge (each 9 seconds) needs to be read. So then vfs there helps a lot... But anyway thank you very much for your awnser, hope we can close this topic with a solution!

How many reads need to be done in a challenge? Number of reads that have to go to the dropbox servers will be the limiting factor. There is a latency of let's say 1s reading a block of data from dropbox. Compared to a hard disk at 10ms that is a lot of latency.

I think you are going to have to be very scientific and tweak the parameters one at a time to see if you get an improvement or not.

8 reads for filter read and 64 reads if filter is passed (probability 1/512). Each seek its 64K, thats why I had --vfs-read-chunk-size 64K, I dont know if its good.

What you want to do is minimise the number of HTTP requests.

You can see these with -vv --dump headers, so tweak the parameters to minimise the HTTP requests.

If it is reading 64k of data each time, then that sounds like a good setting.

You might want to cap the chunk size with

--vfs-read-chunk-size-limit SizeSuffix  Max chunk doubling size (default off)

Probably 64k too. Not sure this will be making any difference...

Try settting --buffer to 64k also.

so I test this mount command?

rclone.exe mount dropbox: X: --cache-dir "D:\rclone-vfs-cache" --multi-thread-streams 1024 --multi-thread-cutoff 128M --network-mode --vfs-cache-mode full --vfs-cache-max-size 100G --vfs-cache-max-age 240000h --vfs-read-chunk-size-limit off --buffer-size 64K --vfs-read-chunk-size 64K --vfs-read-wait 0ms -v --vfs-read-chunk-size-limit 64K --vfs-read-wait 0ms -v -vv --dump

Give it a go and measure the difference as accurately as you can.